Based on what we know from other disciplines, it appears that all religions are equally invalid because there is no supernatural anyways.
What disciplines do you have in mind?
Well, science for one. I think most scientists would agree that something supernatural is not usually part of the conclusion of an experiment.
Yeah, I’ve never heard of that being published in a scientific journal. 🙂
🙂
Do you think those un-supernatural conclusions are because of assumptions or evidence?
Hmm… I’m not sure what you mean.
Well, I read a statement by an atheist Harvard geneticist who said that the reason the scientific community generally comes up with anti-supernatural conclusions is not because of the evidence, but because of the assumptions they bring to the evidence.
What kind of assumptions?
Well, such as materialism (not in the consumer sense… but in the absolute sense). Before they see the evidence, they assume that there is no supernatural.
But how could they do reliable experiments any other way? The “god factor” would be this massive variable that would pretty much render the scientific method useless.
Yeah, you’re right. So would it be fair to say that trying to prove or disprove the supernatural is outside the scope of what science is able to do?
Yeah, that sounds right.